I truly believe that we will see a prequel and a sequel in the future for the Kill Bill movie. The biggest problem I have with this sequel talk isn’t thefact that QT is thinking of making one, because I would welcome a sequel to this awesome movie but rather people online calling it Kill Bill Volume III. Both Volume I and II are apart of the same movie and make only make up one film. That movie “Kill Bill” is over and there is no such thing as a Volume III because Bill is in fact dead. I truly believe that if QT does go ahead with a sequel the name Bill will not be found in it’s title, maybe will see Kill Bea, or Kill Beatrix.

A prequel would be a whole lot better in my opinion because we’ve seen Bea’s story and getting to see Bill’s would make this movie that much better. How he came to be the man that he was in the Kill Bill movie would be great, and telling the story of his father figures is just a great bonus. Maybe the prequel would have Bill in the title, Bill: A Prequel to the Kill Volume 1, and for each of the father figures there be a different Volume, so all in all there be 3 prequel stories. I personally love the title I’ve come up with, and hopefully I’ll get to see it one day.

I just think that the retro thing about Budd and his relationship to B and Bill would be the Killer story. His character had the most depth in the shortest time and everything about him was the tip of the iceberg and also indicative of alot of stuff happening. Besides, Michael Madsen rocks.

Well if you think about it, it’s not really Volume III. Volume 1 and II are both one and the same, they belong to one movie. The next installment will stand on it’s own. For now let’s call it ‘Kill Beatrix’ because that is what it really is. I still believe that QT should go with my idea of bringing in another assassin to aid Elle Driver, because Beatrix has her companion in B.B. and Sophie has Nikki. I was thinking about it today and it makes senses that this showdown if it goes down like this three way I’m thinking about then this would mean we would get to see not 1, not 2, but 3 Hanzo swords all at once. Beatrix has hers, Sophie would have Bill’s, and Elle would have Budd’s.

I believe that this would make for one hella of a showdown. I believe that when we get to this point when we do see Budd’s sword again Elle would have scratched the inscription right off and all that would remain would be Bill’s name. I myself can’t wait to see what QT does come up with.

This is my first post. I agree with what you are saying. I like that concept. And I too have always wondered why people would call the sequel volume 3; volume 1 and 2 were merely two parts of one movie. There can NEVER be a “Volume 3” as “Volume 2” concludes the “Kill Bill” story. There can be, however, an entirely new movie: Either Kill Bill 2 (notice there’s no “Volume” in there) or, like the Man with No Name trilogy, it could be a totally different name like “The Blind and the Limbless” or “Nikki’s Revenge”. Kill Bill itself is a spinoff of Pulp Fiction; It’s the Pilot from Pulp Fiction, as was mentioned by Mia Wallace. The Fox Force 5 = The Deadly Viper Assasination squad. They merely took out the French one who’s specialty is sex and replaced her with Budd (although i’m guessing Sofie Fatale was the french chick, as she’s said to be “another of Bill’s protege”). So, why are those of you that are so pissed about sequels and whatnot not pissed that Kill Bill is a spin-off of Pulp Fiction? I see the “sequel” to Kill Bill being a spinoff in the way that Kill Bill is a spin-off of Pulp Fiction. Can it really be considered a sequel if the entire premise of the movie is turned upside down; the avenger becoming the avenged? I also like the idea of the prequel, and I too think it should be an Animatrix type affair, rather than a feature film.

[quote=“zeppelincheetah”]Well if you think about it, it’s not really Volume III. Volume 1 and II are both one and the same, they belong to one movie. The next installment will stand on it’s own. For now let’s call it ‘Kill Beatrix’ because that is what it really is. I still believe that QT should go with my idea of bringing in another assassin to aid Elle Driver, because Beatrix has her companion in B.B. and Sophie has Nikki. I was thinking about it today and it makes senses that this showdown if it goes down like this three way I’m thinking about then this would mean we would get to see not 1, not 2, but 3 Hanzo swords all at once. Beatrix has hers, Sophie would have Bill’s, and Elle would have Budd’s.

I believe that this would make for one hella of a showdown. I believe that when we get to this point when we do see Budd’s sword again Elle would have scratched the inscription right off and all that would remain would be Bill’s name. I myself can’t wait to see what QT does come up with.

This is my first post. I agree with what you are saying. I like that concept. And I too have always wondered why people would call the sequel volume 3; volume 1 and 2 were merely two parts of one movie. There can NEVER be a “Volume 3” as “Volume 2” concludes the “Kill Bill” story. There can be, however, an entirely new movie: Either Kill Bill 2 (notice there’s no “Volume” in there) or, like the Man with No Name trilogy, it could be a totally different name like “The Blind and the Limbless” or “Nikki’s Revenge”. Kill Bill itself is a spinoff of Pulp Fiction; It’s the Pilot from Pulp Fiction, as was mentioned by Mia Wallace. The Fox Force 5 = The Deadly Viper Assasination squad. They merely took out the French one who’s specialty is sex and replaced her with Budd (although i’m guessing Sofie Fatale was the french chick, as she’s said to be “another of Bill’s protege”). So, why are those of you that are so pissed about sequels and whatnot not pissed that Kill Bill is a spin-off of Pulp Fiction? I see the “sequel” to Kill Bill being a spinoff in the way that Kill Bill is a spin-off of Pulp Fiction. Can it really be considered a sequel if the entire premise of the movie is turned upside down; the avenger becoming the avenged? I also like the idea of the prequel, and I too think it should be an Animatrix type affair, rather than a feature film.
[/quote]

Woah woah, hold your horses there buddy. Kill Bill IS NOT a spin-off of Pulp Fiction. The Fox Force Five and Deadly Viper Assassination Squad are quite similar, but one cannot call Kill Bill a spin-off solely because of that. Your deductive logic is interesting, but it is false. Furthermore, Kill Bill is in a different universe to Pulp Fiction. Therefore, in no way are these two films related, apart from in ways outside of the actual film e.g. trunk shots, long shots, pop culture dialogue.

I have said it before and I will say it again, I think the idea of another part to Kill Bill is ridiculous. Hopefully, QT has got that out of his system, and I don’t want to see any more Kill Bill stuff for another 15 years. If he makes the other part in 15 years as he has claimed, fair enough. But at the moment, I want him to concentrate on his WWII epic and anything else he may have in the pipeline (Grind House (Grind) etc.)

I’m sure this is way off, and it’s most likely been covered by other people on some other forum, but (and correct me if I’m wrong) isn’t the Sheriff from Vol. 1 the same Sheriff that the Gecko brothers smoked in “From dusk till Dawn”? If so, it’s not a “unique world” unto itself…

The fact that he played the sheriff is irrevelant. QT uses the same actors and actresses in most of his films. What are you going to say next - that Uma Thurman plays a human being with a vagina in Pulp Fiction and in Kill Bill?

That’s cool. I don’t think that the question about him playing the exact same character from another movie was in any way similar to the statement “that Uma Thurman plays a human being with a vagina in Pulp Fiction and in Kill Bill”. Were it that I had said that Michael Madsen Played a guy species and he played a guy in kill bill vol. 2 and somehow that’s the same character, then you’d have warrent to give me shit. But I didn’t. So you don’t.

Also, I asked a question. Didn’t make a statement.

Hence the question mark.

But, according to iMDB, Michael Parks plays Texas Ranger Earl McGraw in both FDtD and KBv1.

what!!! what am I reading? I don’t understand… First of all where’s the option on the poll that says “YES! PRETTY PLEASE WITH A FUCKING CHERRY ON TOP!” ????? Because that’s my choice. Kill Bill 3 would be fucking awsome… only, I donno what it could be about considering Bill is dead (unless it was like a zombie movie then it’d be totally bad ass… zombies with ninja skill at fancy swords woooo)… But, I’ll eat any fuckin’ thing up where cute bitches beat the crap out of each other. ;D